Many types of mud flaps have been used for preventing water, mud, rocks and other roadway debris from being directed rearwardly and sidewardly from a moving wheeled vehicle into the path of following traffic. Typically, mud flaps are substantially rectangular in shape and have a solid deflecting panel. The top edge of a typical mud flap is mounted behind a wheel of a vehicle such that the bottom of the mud flap hangs freely near the roadway surface.
While conventional solid mud flaps are effective in deflecting water and roadway debris, they suffer from several disadvantages. First, the solid design of the conventional mud flap prevents air from passing through it, thereby increasing the drag created by the mud flap and decreasing fuel economy. Also, the bottom of a solid mud flap may be displaced rearwardly at high rates of speed, thereby reducing the amount of water and debris the mud flap deflects. Further, the conventional solid mud flap increases the temperature in the area of the tire of the vehicle because air is not permitted to flow through the mud flap. Increased temperature in the area of the tire increases the risk of tire failure. In addition, the sold design of the typical mud flap prevents any water or other roadway debris encountered by the mud flap from passing through the mud flap. As a result, a large proportion of the water and other roadway debris encountered by a conventional solid mud flap is projected off the sides of the mud flap and into the path of other vehicles. The conventional mud flap is also heavy and, therefore, decreases fuel economy and payload capacity.
Several modifications have been made to the conventional solid mud flap to address the disadvantages identified above. For example, mud flaps have been provided with openings to permit some air, water and other debris to pass through the mud flap. Typically, the openings are defined, at least in part, by rearwardly and downwardly extending louvers or flaps. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,350,114 of Salisbury describes a mud flap having a plurality of flexible flaps adapted to be opened by a stream of water and capable of deflecting said stream downwardly. Absent a stream of water, however, the flexible hinged flaps remain substantially closed over the aperture with which each is associated. As a result, the flexible flaps do little to reduce the drag created by the mud flap, the weight of the mud flap, the rearward displacement of the bottom of the mud flap at high speeds, or the increased temperature in the area of the tire. Further, when the flexible flaps are opened by a stream of water, substantial quantities of water may pass through the mud flap without deflection.
Several patents describe mud flaps having openings defined by louvers. See, e.g. U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,088,751; 4,660,846; and 4,921,276. U.S. Pat. No. 5,366,247 of Fischer describes a vehicle splashguard having louvers adapted to deflect water and other debris downwardly rather than sidewardly or rearwardly into the path of following traffic. The louvers extend generally horizontally across substantially the entire width of the splashguard. Similarly, U.S. Pat. No. 5,564,750 of Bajorek et al. describes a mud flap having louvers that extend horizontally across substantially the entire width of the mud flap. In addition, the mud flap of Bajorek includes a vertical rib member midway between the ends of each louver to provide vertical support to the louvers. The louvers of these mud flaps, however, do little to reduce the drag forces created by air resistance because the sum of the areas of the openings is small relative to the surface area of the mud flap panel, and the louvers are angled only slightly from the vertical axis. The louvers of these mud flaps are also likely to break or crack with extended use. In addition, the louvers of these mud flaps increase the depth or thickness of the mud flaps, which may not be desirable on certain types of vehicles. Further, the design of these mud flaps is complicated, and the cost of manufacture, maintenance and repair is high.
Other attempts to overcome the disadvantages of the conventional solid mud flap have been made. U.S. Pat. No. 5,273,318 of Nakayama describes a vehicle mudguard having multiple screens and draining ribs. The mud flap described in Nakayama, however, does not permit any air to flow through it. U.S. Pat. No. 5,582,430 of Baucr et al. describes a spray protection device having an inlet layer and a spacer layer which creates a void therebetween. Such screens and layers, however, are typically made from metal which tends to rust with use and increases the weight of the mud flap. In addition, the complex air flow design of the screens and layers tends to become clogged with use. Like the mud flap of Nakayama, the mud flap of Bauer does not permit air to flow entirely through it. U.S. Pat. No. 4,964,655 of Tucker describes a heavy duty mud flap made from metal segments connected by rods which contain a plurality of alternating rubber discs and spacers. This mud flap is also heavy and complex, thereby increasing fuel consumption and manufacturing, maintenance and repair costs.
It would be desirable, therefore, if a mud flap could be provided which reduces the amount of water and other road debris that is projected off the sides of the mud flap. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided which allows air to pass through its opening. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided which allows some water and other road debris to pass through its openings. It would be further desirable if a mud flap could be provided that is lightweight and resistant to rust and corrosion. It would be still further desirable if a mud flap could be provided that has a single, integrally-formed, mesh panel adapted to allow air to pass through it while deflecting substantially all of the water and roadway debris it encounters. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided which reduces the weight and drag created by the mud flap, thereby increasing fuel economy, payload capacity, and the amount of water and roadway debris the mud flap deflects. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided which does not contribute to increasing the temperature in the area of the tire of a vehicle. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided which is less complicated and costly to manufacture, maintain and repair. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided which is not likely to become clogged with use and is easily unclogged and cleaned. It would also be desirable if a mud flap could be provided that is relatively thin and therefore suitable for use on substantially all types of vehicles. It would be further desirable if a mud flap could be provided which is lightweight and resistant to rust and corrosion.